Ten‐year clinical outcomes from a randomized trial comparing new‐generation everolimus‐eluting stent versus first‐generation Sirolimus‐eluting stent: Results from the RESET extended study

BACKGROUND: New-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) achieved technological innovations and reported clinical advantages as compared with first-generation DES in clinical trials with 3-5 years follow-up. However, detailed clinical outcome data in very long-term follow-up is still scarce. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate 10-year clinical outcomes after first- and new-generation DES implantation. METHODS: In this extende follow-up study of the RESET, which is a largest randomized trial comparing everolimus-eluting stent (EES) with Sirolimus-eluting stent (SES), the study population consisted of 2892 patients from 84 centers. The primary efficacy and safety endpoints were target lesion revascularization (TLR) and a composite of death or myocardial infarction (MI), respectively. Complete 10-year follow-up was achieved in 87.9% of patients. RESULTS: Cumulative 10-year incidences of TLR and non-TLR were not significantly different between EES and SES (13.9% vs. 15.7%, Log-rank p = 0.20, and 33.4% vs. 31.3%, Log-rank p = 0.30). The cumulative 10-year incidence of death/MI was also not significantly different between the groups (32.5% vs. 34.4%, Log-rank p = 0.18). Cumulative 10-year incidence of definite stent thrombosis was numerically lower in EES than in SES (1.0% vs. 1.7%, Log-rank p = 0.16). The lower risk of EES relative to SES was significant for a composite endpoint of target lesion failure (TLF: 19.6% vs. 24.9%, Log-rank p = 0.001) and target vessel failure (TVF: 26.7% vs. 31.4%, Log-rank p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: During 10-year of follow-up, the risks for primary efficacy and safety endpoints were not significantly different between new-generation EES and first-generation SES, although EES compared with SES was associated with a lower risk for composite endpoints such as TLF and TVF.